Worldwide Exclusive –

Documents disclosed here under US Freedom of Information show the US Centers for Disease Control [CDC] spends US tax dollars in foreign countries on studies to claim the vaccination programmes they promote for US children are safe when they know the results of the studies will produce false and misleading negative results.

Mercury is toxic in parts per billion.What the US public were not told is that the study was certain to be unable to detect any effect. The US CDC internal email exchange disclosed here [see more below] obtained under US Freedom of Information shows that to be able to detect any effect in children with the methods used, the dose applied by the age of 3 months had to be more than50 millionths of a gramme of mercury and more than 100 millionths of a gramme by the age of 6 months.

Table 1 of the paper shows Italian children received by the age of 3 months two thirds of that minimum amount; no more 37.5 millionths of a gramme. By 4 months they had only three quarters of that minimum: 75 millionths of a gramme and the maximum by six months was 100 millionths of a gramme, not enough to hit or exceed the threshold needed.

The 2001 exchange of emails was between Dr Thomas Verstraeten and Dr Robert Chen of the US CDC and Dr Elizabeth Miller of the UK’s Public Health Laboratory Service. This also shows a dose of 75 microgrammes of mercury by the age of four months was insufficient to detect an effect. Chen and Miller were at the time looking into a possible study of British children. Italian infants were in the same category as British infants, receiving 75 microgrammes by the age of 4 months.

Do not be deceived into thinking there are no problems with the lower levels of mercury. Studies like this Italian one and previous internal studies by the US CDC are unable to measure the effects at lower levels. It is an issue of precision – not absence of effect.

Notably, the study only included healthy children in the original vaccine trial so those most at risk were excluded. The authors also missed out large numbers of other children most likely to be at risk. And as an example of how unrepresentative of the Italian child population this study was, 70% of the Italian parents had College Degrees.

Children excluded from the study included:

an unknown number of underweight children who are likely to be more susceptible to injury

the body burden of mercury would be proportionately higher

underweight children are likely to include premature infants – [whose effective age is less and who are underdeveloped by the time they are vaccinated compared to full-term infants]

all unwell children at time of vaccination (susceptible group)

over 30% of children dropped out of the study and the authors acknowledged these may have included those injured, the parents not participating “because their children had cognitive developmental problems“

there was no proper control group to make a comparison

the authors compared children who had mercury containing vaccines not against children who had no vaccines or no mercury but against children who had different vaccines with less mercury

Only one case of autism was identified from medical records out 1,704 (an order of magnitude lower than the UK and the US) which also casts doubts on the value of the study.

Stop Press

Evidence from the new Italian study of child disorders linked to vaccination provides strong evidence that independent impartial unbiased objective research is urgently needed comparing vaccinated against unvaccinated children

Why Is This Important?

Despite the US CDC expecting

no positive results

the blunt and imprecise nature of the study

its numerous defects

there were positive results.

Why “Only Two” Cases Are So Significant?

The study used tests and methods which are “blunt instruments”, unlikely to distinguish anything other than large differences between the children studied. The number of children was relatively small 1403, 30% of those most likely to have been affected had dropped out between the first study 10 years ago and the present one. so if there was any difference in the groups, this study started off by looking for “a needle in a haystack”. In other words, the study would only be likely to distinguish only a very small proportion of “normal” from “abnormal”. Many kinds of differences like a drop in IQ of 5 to 25 points, or a fall in linguistic ability just less than a speech impediment would be unlikely to be revealed.

So if with such an imprecise study there are any positive results any statistically significant association would demand further enquiry.“Significantly associated” means that statistically the results could not be dismissed as just within the expected error of the study.

Why Is Vax’ed vs Un-Vax’ed Research So Important?

The most likely means of standing any chance of detecting differences would be a very large study of vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated. More sophisticated tests and assessments would be appropriate – not imprecise tests – “finger-tapping” tests or “Boston Naming”.

In addition, comparing vaccinated with vaccinated made it harder still to distinguish differences. Children studied had been vaccinated and compared to some shall we say “a little bit less vaccinated than others”. This meant that it was likely children with impaired ability were being compared with children with slightly less impaired ability. This would narrow the size of any differences in impairment between the groups studied and made the whole exercise more imprecise still.

Is there Evidence of “Author Bias”?

The Italian authors state “only two” of the outcomes were “significantly associated”. Why important? It shows author bias – coupled with the so far undisclosed financial conflicts of interests. “Only two” is like saying you are “only a little bit pregnant”. It is more significant as the study was to be expected to produce no positive results of any kind, as ChildHealthSafety reported on 28th January.

Details of the main Italian author, Tozzi’s so far undeclared financial conflicts of interest have not been published by the US Journal Pediatics, although recently submitted by UK vaccine and health safety advocate, John Stone.

Fooling Third World Governments

The British study the US CDC was involved with with Dr Elizabeth Miller went ahead and also claimed to find no problems. It was used to reassure third world governments that mercury in vaccines was safe. It claimed the UK level of mercury was the same as the amount of thimerosal used by developing countries that follow the World Health Organisation’s expanded immunization schedule. It was not. Disclosed here is information under UK Freedom of Information showing the WHO schedule exposes the less well fed and more susceptible third world infants to 187.5µg of mercury but by 14 weeks, not 6 months. Third world children are at a much higher risk than US children ever were.

The US Centers For Disease Control and Drug Companies

This is not the first time the US CDC has been mired in controversy over mercury in vaccines. On 7-8 June 2000, a confidential private meeting without public scrutiny took place between vaccine manufacturers’ representatives, 51 US scientists, and a representative of the World Health Organization. This was to discuss a study by US Centers for Disease Control expert Dr Thomas Verstraeten of increasing doses of Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders in children. Verstraeten used US Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) data, an official US governmental data bank on the children from US health maintenance organizations (HMOs).

Verstraeten’s study showed a dose-response relationship between Thimerosal in vaccines and neurodevelopmental disorders in children that held up to rigorous statistical analyses. This means Verstraeten’s study showed a causal association between the amount of Thimerosal in vaccines a child received and the extent to which the child developed the symptoms of impaired brain development . These ranged from tics, speech impairment to symptoms of and full autism. The discussions can be read in the transcript of the Simpsonwood Conference obtained by US organisaton SafeMinds under Freedom of Information.

What can be said about this? When Verstraeten was a public official working for the US CDC there was a serious problem. When Verstraeten was working for GlaxoSmithKline there was no problem.

Vaccine Risks Outweigh Risk of Disease

Autism – A serious problem being ignored

19 Children A Day – 4 in 5 is a Boy

Autism in Britian outstrips all other major disorders affecting British children combined and is substantially more serious than measles. Every day 19 British children develop autism spectrum disorders:

this will be 600,000 British children and adults in the future (birth rate approx 600,000 p.a.)

Mercury in British Vaccines, Autism and Your Child’s Allergies

In addition to the new MMR vaccine, in 1990 infants were also “hit” with the “accelerated” DTP vaccine schedule – receiving three DTP shots – one each at 2, 3 and 4 months. Prior to this the intervals were 3, 5 and 9 to 12 months of age. The DTP vaccine contained a highly neurotoxic ingredient. The ingredient was an organo-mercury excipient called “Thiomersal” [“Thimerosal” in the USA]. Thiomersal is toxic in parts per billion – in extremely small dilutions. The vaccine was The Wellcome Foundation’s Trivax AD DTP vaccine. The Wellcome Foundation is now GlaxoSmithKline.Thiomersal was first introduced by pharmaceutical company Merck in the 1930s and was not clinically trialled for safety in use in vaccines.

Research shows that children with autism appear to have deficient mechanisms for expelling toxins like mercury and it accumulates in the body.

Revealed by ChildHealthSafety exclusively worldwide for the first time [22/Jan/09] information obtained under the UK’s Freedom of Information confirms the British MHRA [Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency] has no data on how much Thiomersal was in Trivax AD DTP vaccine. Although the British DoH [Department of Health] claimed publicly to have known, that claim therefore appears incorrect.

Your Child’s Allergies and Vaccines

Thiomersal is also known to induce allergy. Many children, in particular those with regressive autism, have serious problems with allergies. Some have exceptionally high levels of IgE, [the allergic antibody immunoglobulin E].

The date of the rise can be tracked back to 1990 using publicly available data. This increase has occurred in parallel with significant increases in other disorders like autism, asthma and childhood diabetes.

Thiomersal is a well recognised cause of allergies: [The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products – Medicines Evaluation Unit – Safety Working Party Assessment of the Toxicity of Thiomersal in Relation to Its Use in Medicinal Product SCPMP/SWP/I898/1998 – 8 September 1998].

The use of Thiomersal in other pharmaceuticals [eg. contact len cleaning fluid] has been strictly controlled in Europe: CPMP Position Paper on Thiomersal – Implementation of the Warning Statement Relating to Sensitisation. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products London, 21 October 1999 CPMP/2612/99]

Thiomersal contains 50% by weight of mercury. There is no safe limit – only a “permitted daily/weekly tolerable” limit. This is measured in parts per million per kilogramme of body weight. Those limits apply when ingested in food]. This neurotoxic organo-mercury compound was injected directly into infants’ bodies at a time their bodies and nervous systems were developing the most rapidly at any time in their lives. The amount of thiomersal claimed to be in Trivax AD DTP vaccine was 50 millionths of a gramme injected directly into the body.

A 4 kilo weight 2 month old baby would have received in one injection 63 times higher than the permitted tolerable daily intake in food set by the US Environmental protection Agency and the UK’s Committee on Toxicity.

To protect infants the PTWI set by the UK Committee on Toxicity for intake of mercury compounds in food for women who are pregnant, or who may become pregnant within the following year, or for breast-feeding mothers is one tenth of a millionth of gramme per kilogramme of body weight per day – for a 9 stone woman [57 kg] that is 5.7 millionths of a gram per day.

Calculation of an infant’s daily and overall body burden of toxic mercury must also include the burden from environmental pollution. [Sources include mercury in the air from power station emissions and in fish as a result of oceanic pollution by anti-fouling applied to ships’ hulls. Mercury is liquid at room temperature and evaporates forming a toxic vapour in the air].

Also revealed worldwide by ChildHealthSafety [22/Jan/09] is that the British Government also had no data on Thiomersal content of many other vaccines around that time and some had more than claimed by the British government was in DTP. Examples are Duncan Flockhart’s DTP vaccine – 130 millionths of a gramme thiomersal per millilitre and Lister Institute Pertussis vaccine – 120 mcg/ml Thiomersal. Accordingly, this brings into question how much was in Trivax AD DTP vaccine.

The British Government also hid this lack of knowledge from Parliament. A further revelation made exclusively worldwide by ChildHealthSafety [22/Jan/09]is that British Health Minister Hazel Blears MP misled the English Parliament in 2001 when she said in a Parliamentary answer that “All childhood vaccines licensed since 1986 which have ever contained thiomersal as an excipient are listed in the table” [to the answer]. [House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 3 Jul 2001 (pt 19)]. The table contained no such details and listed only those vaccines granted a licence in the UK since 1993.

Julie Kirkbride MP had asked for the “vaccines …. licensed since 1986 which contain thiomersal“.

If you are asked have you been licensed to drive your car since 2006, you will answer “yes” even if you have held a licence since 1980. Blears’ answer was in fact the answer to the question of the “vaccines granted a licence since 1986 which contain Thiomersal”.

In Whom Can You Trust

The British Government

The British Government claims Thiomersal was phased out of its childhood vaccines in October 2004 [but vaccine stocks may have taken longer to run down and how safe is what has replaced it?].

A previously confidential 1991 internal Merck memorandum published by the USA’s Los Angeles Times shows the UK authorities had then known about the problem and were privately expressing concern to the vaccine manufacturer about the presence of mercury in vaccines. This was along with Sweden, Japan and Switzerland: [‘91 Memo Warned of Mercury in Shots – By Myron Levin – LA Times – February 08, 2005].

So why did they take 13 years to do something about it and why did they and do they continue to tell the British public there is and was no problem when they knew there was and is? And as vaccines also alter the functioning of the immune system, the removal of Thiomersal may well not be the only factor affecting the increases in autism, asthma, allergies and childhood diabetes. [see more below – US Court Decisions and Other Recent Developments].

Independent Medical Professional Organisations

The IOM committee held closed meetings to discuss the report’s content and before considering the evidence. A transcript of a meeting on 12th January 2001 was disclosed in Court proceedings [US District Court of Texas, Eastern District; Case #5:03-CV-141].

Here are some quotes from the transcript:-

[the Centers for Disease Control] “wants us to declare, well, these things are pretty safe on a population basis.” [p33]

“We said this before you got here, and I think we said this yesterday, the point of no return, the line we will not cross in public policy is to pull the vaccine, change the schedule. We could say it is time to revisit this, but we would never recommend that level. Even recommending research is recommendations for policy. We wouldn’t say compensate, we wouldn’t say pull the vaccine, we wouldn’t say stop the program.” [p74]

“we are not ever going to come down that it is a true side effect,” [p97]

“Chances are, when all is said and done, we are still going to be in this category. It is just a general feeling that we probably still are not going to be able to make a statement,” [p123]

What You Can Do

If you found this information helpful there are two things you can do about it.

Please share these pages with others

email the links to this page to others

post links to this page

on your website

on your blog

in comments on relevant websites and blogs

email them to health journalists and journalists from your local newspapers, TV and radio stations – [phone them for details of email addresses or look them up on the internet]

UK Residents – Write To Your Politicians – Do It Now!

Write to your Member of Parliament with the link to this page. If you do not write to your MP, and do not keep on writing them, then don’t complain when politicians do nothing. Write to your Member of Parliament with the link to this page. It is their job to represent you.

Ask your MP to ask the UK’s Secretary of State to explain why the British Government allows officials of the UK’s Department of Health to cause the human rights of children to be violated.

To email your MP, all you need to know is your MP’s name. MP’s email addresses are in the form:-

In the US the official diagnostic definition of what we call “Autism Spectrum Disorders” or ASD are instead called “Pervasive Development Disorders” or PDD for short. That is under the “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn)” or “DSM IV” for short.

“Autistic Spectrum Disorder” is the term applied internationally under the “ICD” or “International Classification of Disease”

Many refer to ASD and PDD as “autism” but “autism” is a subset of the spectrum and is often referred to also as “childhood autism”, “typical autism” and “Kanner autism”. [The common behaviours like hand flapping, loss of eye contact and suchlike in young children are unmistakable, whereas other spectrum disorders like mild Aspergers Syndrome can be more difficult to diagnose.]

6 Responses

I think it is worth mentioning that despite Thomas Verstraeten’s doubts, and the negative findings of Elizabeth Miller’s study (Andrews et al), autism incidence did in fact leap in the UK at the time of the introduction of the accelerated schedule in 1990 – when administration of DPT was brought forward from 3, 5 and 10 months to 2, 3 and 4 months. Indeed, in North London it more than doubled. One thing to bear in mind is that exposure may have been higher in the vaccine than the 50 micrograms stated in the study – several government documents circulating in 1999-2001 suggest it was double the given amount, something later denied but without any explanation. Also, at that period the schedule may have been administered partially and in separate shots, according to parental wishes (or possibly stock availability) and the separate shots could each have 25 micrograms of mercury. 4 separate shots by 3 months would cross Verstraeten’s threshold.

To clarify further, the quality of data in the UK study (Andrews et al) from the General Practitioners Research Database – as Verstraeten also warned in his email before the event – was too poor to obtain meaningful results. Indeed, apart from inadequate vaccine records they were only able to identify autism at a rate of just over 1 in 1,000 when according national statistics there was an incidence of 1 in 100 over the period. As with the Tozzi study many of the vulnerable cases were also filtered out before arriving at its conclusions.

The conduct of this study should also be the subject of a public investigation.

I will definitely link to this site and pass the info along. Please pass the following along:

I found the following statistics on various websites –

AUSTRALIA: Australia has one of the highest allergic incidence rates in the developed world.
CANADA: Between 3% and 4% of Canadian adults, and nearly 6 % of children suffer from food allergies
GERMANY: The prevalence in children is 3 percent to 6 percent, but can be up to 30 percent in high-risk groups, such as children with eczema.
ITALY: An estimated 6 to 8% of the Italian population has food allergies.
JAPAN: about 7% of population had some form of food allergy.
MALAYSIA: about 30% of young children are likely to develop allergic disorders in the first five years of life.
SWEDEN: one out of 15 children with reported adverse reactions to food.
US: One in every 17 children under the age of 3 has food allergy.

And really serious food reactions are not all that rare – “A study in Arch Intern Med 2001 Jan 8;161(1):15-2, Anaphylaxis in the United States: an investigation into its epidemiology, concluded with “The occurrence of anaphylaxis in the US is not as rare as is generally believed. On the basis of our figures, the problem of anaphylaxis may, in fact, affect 1.21% (1.9 million) to 15.04% (40.9 million) of the US population.” PMID 11146694″

So is this epidemic of food allergies mostly among young children caused by being too clean (hygiene theory – food allergies are unknown in undeveloped countries) in the last 5 years or something else?

1960 – children received on average one or two vaccines
1980 – children received 8-9 vaccines
1990 – children were routinely given 10 vaccines
2000 – Children now receive 33 vaccinations before they enter school
2007 – Children are now to receive 48 doses of 14 vaccines by age six and 53-56 doses of 15 or 16 vaccines by age 12.

Vaccines contain an adjuvant that increases the body’s immune response to the protein in the vaccine. Something that the public and most physicians don’t realize is that the adjuvant can also contain a mixture of vegetable and animal oils that have a trace of food protein in them. This is a protected trade secret and does not have to appear on the package insert. The ingredients of many adjuvants can only be found by reading patents. What are these oils? Soy, sesame, peanut, wheat germ, corn, shellfish, fish, etc.

Can a trace amount of food protein in a vaccine cause food allergy? Yes. This has been known since 1839, when the French physiologist Francois Magendie injected animals to create a food allergy to egg whites.

The food industry has to label food that may contain trace amounts of peanuts or nuts but the pharmaceutical industry is exempt.

Before they’re done, they’ll have us sensitized to everything under the sun. But then, they have drugs to respond to these conditions; what are we complaining about? Oh, the periodic anaphylactic death? Well; that’s collateral damage for you…happens all the time…….,get with the PLAN, man. Or we’ll obsolete you too.